"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

Playing the Vancouver card is a tired sop for the blue rinsers. And really only appeals to those who don't get there very often, or fear dwarfed by density, and vibrancy. Cars and traffic don't scare them, big places for people do. It's akin to people on Saturna who venture to the big town of Sidney. Sidney-by-the-Airport as it is commonly known.

When they cluck "Vancouver" people think of Concord Pacific and Coal Harbour. Royally uninformed. That City has many neighborhoods identical to Victoria; what of the Marpole, the Kerrisdale, the Cedar Cottage, the Fraserview, the Strathcona? Broadway Ave is Douglas Street.

Canadians are defined by what they are ~not~ so that's the best way to explain to them what something means. When someone says Victoria is ~not~ Vancouver, what they mean is Victoria is more like Nanaimo. Or Parksville.

When they are against density and intensification, they are promoting sprawl. The more difficulties and denials that occur in the existing built up areas, the easier it becomes to build on the edge; Langford, Sooke, etc.

When they say no to densification, they're saying we support an American model of growth, not European.

When they say no to Smart Growth, they say yea to Dumb Growth.

If it's true that a six-storey buildings will bring ruination, certain death to the city, errant children, cats, dogs living together, and an utter debasement of the character of this fine old grandma, then given the sheer number of those buildings functioning as part of the urban fabric, provinding valuable places for life, work, love, family and creativity, we should have gone to hell in handidart decades ago.

The Humboldt Plan is inadequate, as are most land use plans. They simply do not have the foresight and adaptibility to deal with the complex changes that occur as soon as ink dries. They're more akin to an xmas wish list. It was simply an armchair, coffee table execrise. There was no detailed work on the triple-bottom line imperative, and the financial reality (even using a simple pro-forma) of restoring buildings, building new ones, and making a dearly-needed contribution to housing.

As the great Yogi Berra said, “In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.”

These opponents need to be educated that there is not a heritage crisis, or a greenspace crisis. There is a housing crisis and a climate-change crisis.

[quote name='Nparker']David Turner must be referring to the Christ Church Cathedral in Vancouver:

Then again, what Mayor Moonbeam is really thinking is anyone's guess.[/quote]

I really like the way these highrises frame Christ Church. It reminds me of St. Paul's Cathedral in NYC. I fail to see how classical eclesiastical architecture and contemporary highrises cannot co-exist side-by-side. It seems to me their differences make each more exciting....also what is wrong with trying to be a bit like Vancouver anyway? When did Vancouver become the "enemy"[/quote]

I couldn't agree more, and we're not alone. Many people (especially Europeans) agree with us. Whenever I'm in Vancouver, I always find that humble, little old church amid shining new (or at least, much newer) towers of commerce at one of the busiest intersections in Canada, impressive. Some people insist on buildings "relating to" or "being sympathetic" to their neighbours, but that always just strikes me as a bizarre attempt to anthropomorphize buildings. Buildings don't care who their neighbours are or what they look like, so why do we? I find mixing things up far more interesting and impressive.

Vancouver, the "enemy"?

I don't think so.

If anything, Victoria has been a co-conspirator in this plan (to make a great city). One of the main things that gives Vancouver its "livability" (thus separating itself from other major cities) is it's focus on the residential high-rise. Victoria shares that focus. Just look at the high rise count. The overwhelming majority of high rises in Victoria are residential. If anything, Victoria has led the charge in this way.

I also think that since our society is so young, we have a bit of an inferiority complex that Europeans don't suffer from, given our age difference. As a result, we desperately cling to anything we deem historically significant, even though most Europeans would find our notion of history laughable, and rightly so. I highly doubt that many Europeans would bat an eye at the destruction of a 95 year old building.

The proposal has neighbours and some heritage advocates angry. The heritage advocates worry that the tradeoff -- in the form of higher density on the site -- being offered to restore Mount St. Angela is too great a price, dwarfing the gothic architecture of the building.

Meanwhile, McClure Street residents say they have to bear the traffic and development brunt of the proposal, which originally called for two heritage houses moved to face Burdett Avenue and two condominium towers along with the parking entrance to face McClure. The developer was negotiating with those neighbours yesterday afternoon to see how those concerns might be addressed. Options were to be presented at tonight's hearing.

"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

There are NO towers in this proposal. If 6-story buildings are towers then Victoria is Manhattan. Enough with the misinformation already! You can stick to the facts and this project will be more than contentious enough.

Earlier yesterday, Cielo met with neighbours and came up with a plan to move the east building up the hill so it fronts Burdett, leaving one of the houses in place, so that instead of being side by side the buildings would be staggered. This plan was presented this evening at the end of Cielo's presentation at the beginning of a 4 1/2 hour Public Hearing. This change seemed to muddy the waters for some of the Councillors and they decided not to vote on it tonight, instead sending it back to Planning for review and then on to Committee of the Whole etc.

"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

If they stagger it by moving one of the towers up the hill there's no point in having them twins anymore so might as well start from scratch and come up with something more suitable for a steep hill like Cherry Bank did.

"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

I think it's a very poor idea to bring in this sort of 11th hour "flexibility." Makes you look desperate and plan-less, and it's obvious they did it to appease the suddenly-aroused neighbours. I feel sorry for the Sisters of St. Ann and also for the Isherwoods that this short-sighted opposition suddenly crawled out of the woodwork, giving all the nutjobs an opportunity to invent "the sky is falling" scenarios.

When you buy a game, you buy the rules. Play happens in the space between the rules.

City still considering condo proposalTimes ColonistPublished: Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Victoria city council is still considering a developer's proposal to restore Mount Saint Angela and build condominiums adjacent to it. A story on page B1 Saturday incorrectly stated council had rejected the rezoning request by Cielo Properties following an Aug. 23 public hearing. Rather, the decision is on hold pending more information from staff regarding some last-minute changes by the developer. The public hearing is considered to be closed unless staff deems the changes significant enough to warrant reopening it.

Perhaps the project isn't D.O.A. yet, but frankly, I liked the proposal as it was and don't think that tinkering with it (staggering the buildings, for eg.) would improve it. The reference to "last minute changes" above sounds like tinkering, not a complete redesign.

Victoria, ...city of tinkerers... (rolls eyes)

When you buy a game, you buy the rules. Play happens in the space between the rules.

It's a shame far fewer people will see today's correction than saw the huge error in the headline and story on page B1 of Saturday's paper. It was not usual City Hall reporter Carolyn Heiman, but junior reporter Matthew Kruchak that thought Council had voted no when in fact they simply referred it back to Planning for more evaluation. Council made the right decision because it was very unclear what the final proposal actually was.

"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

Rather than issue a development permit to build two condominium buildings behind the Burdett Avenue heritage property, which dates back to the 1860s, Victoria city council sent the project to a second public hearing scheduled for Jan. 17.

That despite the fact another round of public input wasn't required, and over objections by the developer that any more delay could kill the project, which has already been through two redesigns over the last year and a half.

The revised plans drop the height of the planned buildings, which would face onto McClure Street, from six storeys to four, potentially settling issues over obstructed views of Christ Church Cathedral. The building would also be wood-frame construction rather than concrete and would contain 56 condos, down from the previous 60.

But the changes don't answer all concerns over the project, said neighbour Margaret Cox.

The massing of the building, the added traffic accessing the planned underground parking on McClure, access for garbage removal and worries that blasting could damage other heritage buildings and the rock under the neighbourhood are still unaddressed.

This one seems to have turned into a textbook case of the neighbourhood pot calling the development kettle black.

Again with the parking. So instead of one car every couple of minutes it's one car every three minutes. Golly, it's like Karachi at rush hour. The horror...the horror.

"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

I'm still pissed off at that Fairfield group for killing the original Mount St. Angela proposal (concrete, six storeys, 2 slim buildings). They succeeded in jeopardizing care for female seniors just because they can't handle what would have amounted to a beautification of that currently tedious bit of road. What selfishness!

Have they noticed how much better the Vancouver / McClure corner looks with the new Chelsea nearly done? Imagine how much better the street would look with another handsome, well-built concrete building next door.

As for traffic, give me a break already. Have they noticed how much less traffic there is on Vancouver, now that the Vancouver / View intersection is closed? All the cars have moved back to Cook (and some to Quadra). The traffic was coming from all over Fairfield, and that little development wouldn't have added much at all.

When you buy a game, you buy the rules. Play happens in the space between the rules.

It is selfishness. The concerns over heritage housing and blasting or traffic on the roads are non-issues, but alas they're presented in such a way by the various groups opposing this project that local residents are persuaded to side with the NIMBYs.

Someone told me there's postering around town publicizing some sort of meeting regarding some "stop Mt. St. Angela" movement (it will destroy heritage--too bulky, etc). It's tonight at 7 pm at the Garry Oak Room on Thurlow behind Sir James Douglas school in Fairfield.

I'd go, but I have my Operating Thetan Level III exam tonight. Can anyone else go and bring back a report? Inquiring minds want to know.

"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009